Agreed. And it's not just the quarterbacks. Maybe contracts should just be limited to the guaranteed money spread out evenly over the years. It might make team rosters more "consistent" with players and fans, instead of teams cutting and trading them based on the cap and how they can manage or manipulate it. As I've said before, this is the business side of the NFL that I don't care for.
I'm sure hahaha
Unfortunately it would be about 3 years too late.
Yeah, this is the hypocrisy of the "Players Association". When they fought for a bigger (and 100% deserved) share of the revenue, they sold it as a desire to spread the wealth to the veteran players. Meanwhile, all the additional $$ went to the top 5-10% of the league and did nothing to help, if anything it hindered, the "vet" player
I don't get the Floyd hate. He's been a damn good run defender and has shown ability to rush the passer when the QB holds the ball longer then 2.1 seconds.
Nobody hates him. He's the 16th highest paid edge rusher in the league and he's not the 16th best or close to that IMO. He's over paid, he's a nice player but isn't worth what we gave him for what we get on the field.
Guessing that is the case here with big 54. He's got to be on that restructure list.
Restructures normally have no affect on a player. It's just accounting. Converting base salary into a bonus. Maybe adding a void yr to the contract...again nothing that affects when or what a player is paid.
You are correct. I indicated “restructure” when I should have stated “renegotiate”. So I should have stated “I think we are seeing Rams FO approaching some vets to renegotiate their contract”.
